Law Archives - Page 24 of 39 - Protection of Conscience Project Library

Access to emergency contraception

Rebecca J Cook, Bernard M Dickens

Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology Canada

Abstract
The merits of non-prescription distribution of levonorgestrel as emergency contraception (EC), which is effective within 72 hours of unprotected intercourse, are contentious. The advantage of promptness and convenience of access may be offset by the absence of medical counselling. Opposition to EC based on the possibility of the drug acting after fertilization but before implantation departs from standard medical criteria of pregnancy. Physicians who propose to apply non-medical criteria, and use religious objections to abortion to deny prescription of EC, must publicize their opposition in advance, so that women may seek assistance elsewhere. When objecting practitioners, or facilities, become responsible for women for whom EC is indicated, such as rape victims, they are bound ethically and legally to refer them to reasonably accessible non-objecting sources of care.

Cook RJ, Dickens BM. Access to emergency contraception. J Ob Gyn Canada. 2003 Nov;25(11):914-916.

When Free Exercise Exemptions Undermine Religious Liberty and the Liberty of Conscience: A Case Study of the Catholic Hospital Conflict

Brietta R Clark

Extract
Conclusion
Using this framework, I propose a more protective principle for free exercise protection than currently exists, one that requires a heightened scrutiny of all laws that burden religious liberty, even neutral laws of general applicability. This review should examine carefully the need for the government law and the possibility of an exemption or accommodation that will not undermine the purpose of the law. However, I would not go as far as some states in providing almost absolute free exercise protection from government laws serving important government interests. Rather, the principle I advocate requires a balancing of interests tipped to favor laws protecting third parties’ from harm over religious claimants’ objections. The Catholic hospital conflict demonstrates how even under this more protective free exercise principle, the rule of law and the self–limiting principle of the liberty of conscience and religious liberty operate as justifiable limits on the scope of free exercise protection. The hospitals’ free exercise interests must be balanced against the potential harm to patients who cannot access necessary reproductive health care and information, which means that in many cases exemptions for religious hospitals will be denied.

Clark BR. When Free Exercise Exemptions Undermine Religious Liberty and the Liberty of Conscience: A Case Study of the Catholic Hospital Conflict. Oregon Law Review. 2003 Fall;82(3):625-694.

In Good Conscience: The Legal Trend to Include Prescription Contraceptives in Employer Insurance Plans and Catholic Charities’ “Conscience Clause” Objection

Kate Spota

Extract
This Note examines Petitioner’s constitutional argument in Catholic Charities v. Superior Court as applied to a California statute drafted with a narrowly drawn “conscience clause” exemption. First, this Note describes the background for Roman Catholic opposition to contraceptives, and contrasts the reasons behind women’s rights activists’ claim for equal access to contraception as a part of reproductive freedom. Second, this Note examines the preeminent cases decided by the U.S. Supreme Court, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, and the California Supreme Court, as well as the relevant federal statutes and administrative decisions used by the California Court of Appeal in deciding Catholic Charities. Third, this Note describes in detail the arguments advanced by the Petitioner in Catholic Charities and the court’s resulting analysis. Concluding that the Court of Appeal of California correctly decided against the Petitioner in Catholic Charities, this Note examines the possible impacts of that decision on society’s view of women and on the Catholic health care system. Finally, this Note concludes that the California Supreme Court will affirm the appellate court’s decision and hold that the mandatory inclusion of prescription contraceptives in insurance plans, even for institutions whose religious beliefs are contrary to the mandate, does not violate the Free Exercise Clause or the Establishment Clause of the U.S. or California Constitutions.

Spota K. In Good Conscience: The Legal Trend to Include Prescription Contraceptives in Employer Insurance Plans and Catholic Charities’ “Conscience Clause” Objection. Cathol U Law Rev. 2003;52(4):1081-1113.

Human Rights Dynamics of Abortion Law Reform

Rebecca J Cook, Bernard M Dickens

Abstract
The legal approach to abortion is evolving from criminal prohibition towards accommodation as a life-preserving and health-preserving option, particularly in light of data on maternal mortality and morbidity. Modern momentum for liberalization comes from international adoption of the concept of reproductive health, and wider recognition that the resort to safe and digniﬁed healthcare is a major human right. Respect for women’s reproductive self-determination legitimizes abortion as a choice when family planning services have failed, been inaccessible, or been denied by rape. Recognition of women’s rights of equal citizenship with men requires that their choices for self-determination be legally respected, not criminalized.

Cook RJ, Dickens BM. Human Rights Dynamics of Abortion Law Reform. Hum Rights Quart. 2003 Feb;25(1):1-59. Available from:

Prenatal screening, autonomy and reasons: the relationship between the law of abortion and wrongful birth

Rosamund Scott

Extract
This article focuses on . . . the locus and extent of legal decision-making power as regards the disabled fetus. It does this by exploring how the relationship between the law of abortion and that of wrongful birth affects the scope of a pregnant woman’s decision-making abilities in this context. . . .In order to reflect on how the law shapes and controls a woman’s (or couple’s) autonomy in this context, the article considers both the non- rights-based English legal position on abortion and its rights-based US counterpart, in addition to exploring aspects of the law of wrongful birth in both jurisdictions. It also makes some suggestions as to the value of autonomy in this context and how extensive it should be at law, although the opportunity to do so here is limited. The discussion entails reflection on the role of the medical profession, the relationship between autonomy and reasons and the interests of people with disabilities or impairments.

Scott R. Prenatal screening, autonomy and reasons: the relationship between the law of abortion and wrongful birth. Med Law Rev. 2003 Jan 01; 11(3):265-325.

The Fallacies of Objections to Selective Conscientious Objection

Amir Paz-Fuchs, Michael Sfard

Abstract
This paper critically analyzes the theoretical and pragmatic arguments raised against the refusal of individuals to serve in a specific military campaign that they view as immoral. The Israeli Supreme Court case of Zonshein v Judge-Advocate General will serve as an axis of the discussion, as it combines two related facets: first, the Court’s decision touches upon most of the difficult issues in the field of conscientious objection. And second, the development leading up to the decision was accompanied by an exceptional clash of academics, each side summoning expert opinions in support of its claim.

Courts worldwide have accepted that a categorical distinction exists between universal and selective conscientious objection. The combination of the Zonshein decision and the accompanying academic debate presents the opportunity to reexamine the theoretical and pragmatic reasons that are offered as support for distinguishing the two ‘types’ of conscientious objection. Close scrutiny finds them wanting.

Paz-Fuchs A, Sfard M. The Fallacies of Objections to Selective Conscientious Objection. Israel Law Review, Special Issue: Refusals to Serve – Political Dissent in the Israel Defense Forces. 2002 Fall; 36(3);111 – 143. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/S0021223700017994.

The injustice of unsafe motherhood

Rebecca J Cook, Bernard M Dickens

Abstract
This paper presents an overview of the dimensions of unsafe motherhood, contrasting data from economically developed countries with some from developing countries. It addresses many common factors that shape unsafe motherhood, identifying medical, health system and societal causes, including women’s powerlessness over their reproductive lives in particular as a feature of their dependent status in general. Drawing on perceptions of Jonathan Mann, it focuses on public health dimensions of maternity risks, and equates the role of bioethics in conscientious medical care to that of human rights in public health care. The microethics of medical care translate into the macroethics of public health, but the transition compels some compromise of personal autonomy, a key feature of Western bioethics, in favour of societal analysis. Religiously-based morality is seen to have shaped laws that contribute to unsafe motherhood. Now reformed in former colonizing countries of Europe, many such laws remain in effect in countries that emerged from colonial domination. UN conferences have defined the concept of ‘reproductive health’ as one that supports women’s reproductive self-determination, but restrictive abortion laws and practices epitomize the unjust constraints to which many women remain subject, resulting in their unsafe motherhood. Pregnant women can be legally compelled to give the resources of their bodies to the support of others, while fathers are not legally compellable to provide, for instance, bone-marrow or blood donations for their children’s survival. Women’s unjust legal, political, economic and social powerlessness explains much unsafe motherhood and maternal mortality and morbidity.

Cook RJ, Dickens BM. The injustice of unsafe motherhood. Dev World Bioeth. 2002 May;2(1):64-81

Emergency contraception provision: a survey of emergency department practitioners

Reza Keshavarz, Roland C Merchant, John McGreal

Abstract
Objectives: To determine emergency department (ED) practitioner willingness to offer emergency contraception (EC) following sexual assault and consensual sex, and to compare responses of practitioners from states whose laws permit the refusal, discussion, counseling, and referral of patients for abortions (often called “opt-out” or “abortion-related conscience clauses”) with those of practitioners from states without these laws.

Methods: Using a structured questionnaire, a convenience sample of ED practitioners attending a national emergency medicine meeting was surveyed.

Results: The 600 respondents were: 71% male, 29% female; 34% academic, 26% community, and 33% resident physicians; and 7% nurse practitioners and physician assistants. Many respondents (88%) were inclined to offer EC to those sexually assaulted by unknown assailants. More practitioners said they were willing to offer EC if the assailant was known to be HIV-infected rather than if the assailant had low HIV risk factors (90% vs. 79%, p < 0.01). More respondents would prescribe EC after sexual assault than consensual sex (88% vs. 73%, p < 0.01). The rates of willingness to offer EC were the same for practitioners in states with “abortion-related conscience clauses” and those from other states.

Conclusions: Most ED practitioners said they were willing to offer EC. Although the risk of pregnancy exists after consensual sex, practitioners were less willing to prescribe EC after those exposures than for sexual assault. “Abortion-related conscience clauses” did not seem to influence willingness to offer EC.

Keshavarz R, Merchant RC, McGreal J. Emergency contraception provision: a survey of emergency department practitioners. Acad Emerg Med. 2002 Jan;9(1):69-74.

Misperception and Misapplication of the First Amendment in the American Pluralistic System: Mergers between Catholic and Non-Catholic Healthcare Systems

Jason M Kellhofer

Extract
This note questions the wisdom of those who contend that Catholic health providers, to constitutionally qualify for government assistance or be permitted to merge with public entities, must be stripped of that which makes them most effective – their religious identity. The threat to sectarian healthcare has steadily been on the rise as can be seen in actions such as the American Public Health Association’s recent approval of a policy statement recommending more government oversight to preclude the dropping of reproductive services when Catholic and Non-Catholic hospitals merge. Section II explores why these mergers occur and why certain services are subsequently dropped. Section III applies a historical analysis to refute the argument that public and private are meant to remain separate. After establishing that pluralism has been and is presently the foundation of the American society and its healthcare, section IV evaluates whether the Establishment Clause or the Free Exercise Clause of the First Amendment is in danger of violation by mergers between Catholic and Non-Catholic hospitals. Finally, section V addresses the argument that Catholic healthcare mergers constructively deny women, most especially indigent women in rural areas, the right to reproductive services, namely abortion.

Kellhofer JM. Misperception and Misapplication of the First Amendment in the American Pluralistic System: Mergers between Catholic and Non-Catholic Healthcare Systems. J. Law Health. 2001-2002;16(1):103-104.

The High Cost of Merging With A Religiously-Controlled Hospital

Monica Sloboda

Berkeley Women's Law Journal — Berkeley Women’s Law Journal

Extract
Conclusion
The trend of hospital mergers between religious and non-religious hospitals may continue to threaten access to reproductive health services, especially for patients who already have limited access because they live in rural areas or have low incomes.l” However, as this essay suggests, there are several avenues that concerned citizens and activists can take to try to prevent the loss of these vital services.l ” The creativity and determination of those who commit themselves to ensuring that reproductive health services will continue to be available to all who desire them has resulted in several viable legal and practical methods of intervention. Although I believe it is important to respect the religious rights and beliefs of others. when the expression of these beliefs encroaches on patients’ rights to access basic health services, intervention is appropriate and necessary. I hope that public outcry, in the forms of legal and grassroots action, will persuade state actors, legislatures, hospital administrators, and clergy to properly acknowledge patients’ rights and participate in the creation of acceptable solutions to the financial problems that hospitals increasingly face. We need solutions that do not deny essential health services to any group of people.

Sloboda M. The High Cost of Merging With A Religiously-Controlled Hospital. Berkeley Women’s Law J. 2001 Sep;140-156.